July 14, 2017

Steven Johnson wrote about the methods — and ethics — behind humanity’s latest attempts to beam messages into space.

Steven Johnson’s wonderful piece detailing all the issues surrounding interstellar/interplanetary contact certainly touched all the relevant issues. I firmly support the SETI efforts to listen in on the possibility of extraterrestrial life. But I also fully understand how the METI program could lead to problems, even though cosmic distances tend to mitigate those concerns. The idea I found most interesting was the line: ‘‘How can you send a message to a life-form . . . that you know nothing at all about?’’ There are quite a number of life-forms here on Earth that are, demonstrably, quite intelligent and about whose intellect and cognition we know very little. All my life I have been intrigued by the possibility of extraterrestrial life. Still am. But we could learn much about that possible communication by learning to communicate with the ‘‘alien’’ species that share our world. Carlos D. Martinez, Rego Park, N.Y.

Illustration by Giacomo Gambineri

We, as a society, are not sufficiently mature to even address any issue that might address our species’ extinction.

We are not convinced of global warming, despite the evidence that it is true. Darwin’s views on evolution are, in the main, fact, regardless of the refinement of the details; and prejudice within our species is nearly genocidal with its impact. We are not eligible as a species or a civilization to make decisions about possible extinction events or issues. We need to shut up and get our social, political and scientific houses in order before trying to invite unknown aliens to ‘‘Come on down, y’all.’’ We might end up on the menu or in slave quarters. And religious concerns should not even be on the table for any form of consideration because there is not any factual evidence to support any tenet of any religion: They must be taken on faith, and you must believe, despite what the facts may belie concerning those beliefs.

The whole METI thing needs to be decided based on facts, of which we have damned few, and taking a ‘‘Wouldn’t it be nice if. . .” is hardly a tactic designed to ensure our survival as a species. Jay Brown, Seminole, Fla.

Peg Tyre wrote about a for-profit company’s mission to educate children in developing countries through a chain of inexpensive schools.

Illustration by Giacomo Gambineri

Peg Tyre’s ‘‘The Bridge Effect’’ dredged up many familiar frustrations associated with corporate America’s impulse to appropriate culture and promote a hollow version of compassion. Being a public-school teacher in Milwaukee, I have been able to observe this movement from its genesis. It is an adherence to appearance that drives the decision-making.

The essential flaw in for-profit education is the almost willful failure to realize that it is not the act of providing ‘‘customer service’’ that is at the core of education. It is the act of sustaining community — of compassionately communing with children and families in the context of a culture — that makes this effort succeed. This is the axiomatic difference that explains why for-profit educational companies so often fail. Jeff Cartier, Milwaukee

Illustration by Giacomo Gambineri

I was struck by how similar the story of Bridge International Academies is to the proliferation of private charter schools in the United States. Like many American private charter schools, Bridge schools are set in very poor communities and feature a market-based education model; founders who are entrepreneurs, not educators; conflicts with local public schools; parents who are confused about the benefits for their children; and teachers who are uncertified or underprepared for their work. I hope that we learn from Bridge International Academies and rely on other kinds of answers as we work within communities to lift the lives of students and families who live in poverty in the United States. Pamela S. Carroll, president, Council of Academic Deans From Research Education Institutions, Orlando